The Rapture Is A Lie

I am writing this not to put people down, but rather to highlight the frightening lack of intellectualism among Christians. For some, the idea that little rational thought and Christianity often go hand in hand is like commenting that the sky s blue. While I do not feel the same about the detractors, they will look on these ramblings as a bit of silliness. It is my job, literally, to mature Christians in their study of the Bible, and in this I will attempt to do so.

Here is a normal conversation I have with someone:
The topic of rapture somehow comes up. Usually I'm being told how to teach something.
Me - "Yea, I don't believe in a rapture."
Dude - *Blank Stare* "... Don't you read the Bible?"
Me - "Yea. Do you?"
Dude - "Yes, but I guess I take the Bible literally."
Me - "I see. So where does the Bible, literally, talk about a rapture?"
Dude - "Ummm..."
Me - "Why don't you go look it up and we'll talk about it next week."

This is not an uncommon response when it comes to most topics, and in all fairness they don't really need to know it off the top of their head. The hope is that they are going to attempt to rigorously defend a position, that they have given it at least a cursory study. If a person has been spoon fed these ideas and told they are necessary to be a Christian, I will usually start off with a history lesson.

Most people are rather shocked when I tell them that the idea of a rapture is a fairly new innovation, being traced back to the 1830's. (Btw, when you're dealing in thousands of years of tradition, 180 years is considered "new".) The idea started in Britain, where it grew in prominence due to the life and work of John Darby. It is unknown whether Darby really came up with the idea himself. There is evidence that suggests it started with a 15 year old girl in Scotland, Margaret MacDonald, who had a vision of a 2-stage return of Jesus during a Benny Hinn style healing craziness. Darby took this idea and expanded on it when he joined up with the group called the "Plymouth Bretheren". Darby was a hit with these kids and he began teaching a "rapture of the saints" to precede Jesus' return.

While all of this was well and good, we really have the Scofield Reference Bible to thank for our predicament. In 1909, the Scofield Bible began printing and would become the weapon of choice to beat unsuspecting unbelievers over the head, especially during the conception and rise of the "Fundamentalists". And wouldn't you know, rapture was right there in the footnotes telling everyone how and what they ought to believe. (WARNING: DO NOT READ THE STUDY BIBLE FOOTNOTES. ATTEMPT TO THINK FOR YOURSELF) Thank goodness for footnotes! It is from this sordid background that we find the ignoble history of the rapture.

Usually a history lesson isn't quite good enough to cause people to relenquish their death grip on the rapture. I continue the teaching lesson by setting out for the king of supposed rapture prooftexts: 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17.
For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.

Every person who I have said, "Why don't you go look it up and we'll talk about it next week" has come back to me with this passage. To be honest, there are other passages people will attempt to bring up but they all share one very significant similarity.

All supposed rapture proof texts are arguments from silence.


Anyway, back to those Thessalonians. Is that passage talking about rapture? No. Is it really concerned with end times at all? Not really. The people are concerned because their fellow Christians have died and everyone thought Jesus would return before anyone died. The point Paul is trying to make is that whether alive or dead, neither is better than the other because all go together to be with Jesus. But we go to meet Jesus in the "air"... huh? That's where Jesus went, if he had gone to Chicago it would say they meet him in Chicago. But we're going to be among the "clouds"... huh? Sure. Are the clouds heaven? Do we stay in the clouds? There are more quesions than answers if you take this to be a rapture text. Not to mention the whole "meet" word in the Greek was the same word used to describe a dignitary who came from a far away land to your country. You then sent men to meet the coming dignitary before they reached your city. What happened next? Did they stay out there? No. Did they go back with the dignitary? No. They escorted the dignitary back to their city. If anything this passage is directly contradicting anything rapture related.

I know there are more passages. Eric and I were talking about this a while ago and he asked me about the Thessalonians passage and what I said about it goes for most rapture proof-texts: If you didn't already have an understanding of what rapture is, would you make the connection that this is teaching Jesus will come to earth, take christians to heaven as a sort of holding tank, then wait around and come back (btw how do you wait around outside of time)? Ridiculous.